danballfandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:Comment Boards
Please add events on the comment boards! The ones I put in are all fom my own experience alone! --Sand master 16:58, 29 November 2008 (UTC) I'm trying to remember some of the big events on the Comments Boards. I can't remember any more major events except when GRINCH left and everyone either hated him or liked him, so it caused a flame war. Very minor, though. :EDIT: Also, should the Great Debate be its own topic? It has enough info to write 4 forums. Much less a wiki article.--Buggy793 16:03, 8 December 2008 (UTC) This is Wrong Whoa! I was NEVER the "Organization", as long as I can remember! :O --Yonder 18:06, 29 November 2008 (UTC) Are you sure? I strongly remember that the conclusion was that you were the Organization! --Sand master 18:40, 29 November 2008 (UTC) :No. Remember? ~Golden Actor~ was behind that scam. Yonder's innocent. Not to mention, that wasn't the first act against pointless uploads... A few weeks after I joined(maybe a few monthsregret this), I started a list and tried to get rid of all scams, spams, and wasted upload spots(See my Upload "Message for Everyone") By the way, you might also want to mention that people actually followed through with their threats and left Powder Game. They haven't been seen since. (Dreadzone, someone else whose name escapes me)--Buggy793 16:01, 8 December 2008 (UTC) I remember being too busy fighting Jalapeno to really remember. The Organization was the first truly successful list, though. Also, I need to write down the legacy of GRINCH and the sudden amounts of impersonations and such. There are so mny things to write!--Sand master 12:16, 9 December 2008 (UTC) :Also write how he eventually left. A guy named "GrinchHater" or "IHateGrinch" (something like that). and a guy named "The Illusionist" accused GRINCH of copying his upload. GRINCH got angry and left, leaving behind a comments board that flamed for about two or three days. His explanation was that his parents got annoyeed with it, but you probably shouldn't mention that...--Buggy793 16:07, 10 December 2008 (UTC) I want to write it after I finish with the Great Debate.--(SANDMASTER) 16:46, 10 December 2008 (UTC) GRINCH did not quit because of The Illusionist. He left because his parents divorced, and he had problems with it, thus he did not have time for computers. I remember CLEARLY that he had said that on the comments board. Yes, but he only became big after fighting the Illusionist.--Sand master 23:29, 10 December 2008 (UTC) OH SHI-! I still have like 3 or 4 debates to write down, and I'm only 60% done with the Great Debate!!! --(SANDMASTER) 14:55, 1 December 2008 (UTC) SandMaster, send me the copy of the Great Debate again. I'll help with the Article, and I want to see how it's been going. --Buggy793 16:26, 8 December 2008 (UTC) HELP I want to set up a listo of reasons why a post won't go through to the boards. I need help getting lists of how many characters, how many posts, word censors, and information about IP-codes as I can get! Can someone help me work on this? --(SANMDASTER) 18:31, 12 January 2009 (UTC) LOL Wow, you really bash the people on the comment boards. How about you stop generalizing? I seriously loled when you wrote, in poor grammatical form, about the "great orators" who existed on the comment boards so long as 1/2 of a year ago. : I agree with you, and you are invited to improve it or at least to improve parts of it. --Justme2 14:35, 23 March 2009 (UTC) There never were any great orators.--(SM) AFG? Candiadate for undo? Has anybody heared of this thing? Is it relevant. Or is this candiatate for an "undo"? (see this edit by User:67.87.180.44, probably the same as User:AFG_Support) --Justme2 22:58, September 13, 2009 (UTC) :Hmm, Ok, found at least some comments about it, by doing a quick search ... don't know ... --Justme2 23:11, September 13, 2009 (UTC) Flame wars on the CBs Should we add something about them? (especially the one on the SRCB) - - -SPAM, - 14:53, August 7, 2011 (UTC) :I guess if it's a really big flame war that's been going on for some time, then I'll be okay with it. I just don't want it to be heavily biased. ಠ_ಠ Waddle D33 (Talk • ) 21:02, August 8, 2011 (UTC) :Flame wars are amazing. The Mojitos (talk) Greatest 21:54, August 20, 2014 (UTC) Nominating for deletion (or possibly merge into another article like Dan-Ball) Upon looking over the article a bit, I've decided to nominate this article for deletion. Some questions/reasons I'd like to state/raise myself are: *Are the comment boards themselves really that important to write an entire wiki article about? (IMO just explaining how it's a mini-forum created for every game, for registered users should be clear enough.) *The article seems more focused on the limitations of the forum than its actual purpose (mentioned in both lead and Limitations sections) *The Content section is weasel worded (e.g. "majority of comments" or "Trolling, including the impersonation of other users") and offers no examples/solid links. As time goes on the actual accuracy of the section may be impacted, as older comments are basically deleted forever. **I'm not sure if there is a solution to this other than to keep cached copies of the page. *The article itself doesn't appear to be very prominent either, as only link to it:Acronyms, which is practically an orphan itself, and Account.) 01:40, August 21, 2014 (UTC) :Comment boards are important for DAN-BALL. Therefore, they should stay. However, merging with another article could be a better choice. The question is "Which one?". Plus, this page hasn't been edited in years, as you can tell. ( Omega16)(Talk) 01:45, August 21, 2014 (UTC) ::Yeah, I hardly agree with deletion. And not just because I just updated it with a ton of stuff. They're fine as they are, because the comment boards really are important to a lot of Dan Ball users. Maybe not you, but the ones that upload or play SR sure like them. Besides, if you were going to delete it for those reasons, wouldn't it just be better to edit it yourself instead of making a whole new section, and probably run into the same problems? My point is, this is the Dan Ball wiki. It's supposed to have enough information about every part of Dan Ball. The answer isn't deleting everything you don't like, but fixing what you don't like. ::As I explained, a lot of users use the comment boards. ::They should know it's limitations, and if it has to many, add some positives. It's useful information. ::Remember, most of that section hasn't been edited, of course it won't be perfect, but again, deleting valuable, albeit poorly worded information is never good. Just fix the section to you liking. ::Once again, lack or links is not a reason for deletion. The fact is, most articles relating to this don't exist, so they've been explained in the article itself. Remember, if you can delete and article, you can add links. This concludes my rant. Starrysock (talk) 03:11, August 21, 2014 (UTC) ::::I also believe the comment boards' article should stay. ::::It took me about a year and a half of dan-balling before I found the boards. Those boards then lead to discovering the wiki and forum. It's pretty important if you ask me :) ::::[[User:Hachi1|'' Hachi1 '']] 27px 04:37, August 21, 2014 (UTC) :: The Color illusion and Looking for mistakes are not prominent also, but they still have their own pages. So I don't think this is a reason to delete this page. There can also be some rewording to make it sound better. Ivan247Talk Page 05:02, August 21, 2014 (UTC) :::Fair enough. I haven't noticed them. 17:46, August 21, 2014 (UTC) ::I don't think we have an article for misc. portions of the DB website, do we? 17:54, August 21, 2014 (UTC) ::Also, I forgot to mention this before, but this article contains a lot of important historical information in the older edits concerning the past debates. I've never witnessed and article's deletion, but I'm sure that archive would be erased too. Which would be a terrible loss for anyone who actually uses the comment boards. I'm glad it's not being deleted anymore. Starrysock (talk) 17:59, August 21, 2014 (UTC) ::: Apologies for my rushed, poorly terribly formatted response (I had to go to an appointment). I removed the delete tag for now. :::As far as I'm concerned, I think we should still remove the Content section for the reason listed above. It may give people an idea of what the boards are like, but the way it is written just doesn't seem very wiki-like to me. 19:30, August 21, 2014 (UTC) ::::This is why we can edit it. It'll take some work, but it will look a hell of a lot better than it was 3 years ago. ( Omega16)(Talk) 21:22, August 21, 2014 (UTC) ::::Yeah, but the content section is still fairly important. As Omega16 said, I think we should edit it and not remove it. You can remove it, it's a fairly minor thing, but I think it would be better to keep it just to inform people about every aspect of the comment boards, which is the true purpose of the wiki, correct? ::::Also, look at the comment boards, that's basically what the majority of comments are, so you can re-word it, but good luck with actually changing it. Starrysock (talk) 22:02, August 21, 2014 (UTC)